E3S Web of Conferences 3, 0100 5 (2014 )
DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/ 2014 03 01005
C Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2014
Outdoor Environment of Low-cost Housing: A case study of
Flat Taman Desa Sentosa
Mohd Farid Mohamed 1 , Sudharshan N. Raman 2, Tito Maulana Iman Pratama3 , Wardah Fatimah
Mohammad Yusoff 4
1,2,3,4
Department of Architecture, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor,
Malaysia
Abstract. One of the early objectives of high-density low-cost flat housing is to
overcome the squatter problems in urban areas such as in Kuala Lumpur. As the country
progresses towards being a developed nation, the quality and standard of living of its
people have also improved. Low-cost flat housing initiative has also gone through
changes to provide better living quality. This paper discusses on the occupants’
satisfaction perception of outdoor environmental quality (OEQ) of a selected high-density
low-cost flat housing located in the state of Selangor in Malaysia. The objective of the
paper is to obtain the level of perception by the occupants of low-cost flats on the OEQ.
The methodologies used in this study are site observation and questionnaire survey. This
study found that the OEQ in the low-cost flat has generally fulfilled the five out of 6
elements of OEQ. The only element that found to have poor perception is the level of
safety.
1 Introduction
Low-cost housing is an important housing category in Malaysia where one of its initial objective
is to overcome the squatter problem in urban areas such as in Kuala Lumpur. Low-cost housing is
very important in Malaysia since it provides cheap and affordable homes for low-income families
throughout Malaysia. In urban areas, high-density low-cost housings are provided as a result of high
land price. Due to the importance of low-cost housing in the development of Malaysia, there are
various studies were conducted on the low-cost housing such as by Mohit et al. [1], Abdul Ghani [2]
and Idrus and Ho [3].
According to the National Housing Company Malaysia (Syarikat Perumahan Negara Berhad or
SPNB), a government-owned company under the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, it
defines the low-cost house under its program as a house with built-up area of 700 square feet (50
square feet more than the previously introduced three bedroom low-cost flat) and priced from
MYR35,000.00 in Peninsular Malaysia (or from MYR50,000.00 in East Malaysia or Malaysian
Borneo) [4].
The People Housing Program (Program Perumahan Rakyat) is a program under the National
Housing Department of Malaysia [5] which provides low-cost housing. Under this program, the
selling prices of low-cost houses are MYR30,000.00 or MYR35,000.00 in peninsular Malaysia.
Multi-storey low-cost housing between 5- to 18-storey with the minimum floor area of 700 square feet
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Article available at http://www.e3s-conferences.org or http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20140301005
E3S Web of Conferences
are built under this program. Each unit is provided with a living room, a dining room, three bedrooms,
a kitchen and 2 bathrooms.
An important indicator of housing quality and condition which affects the occupants’ quality of
life is residential and neighborhood satisfaction [3]. Therefore, ensuring occupant’s satisfaction in
housing is critical to obtain good quality of life. In the context of low-cost housing, with the
limitations discussed previously, the risk of poor OEQ in this type of housing is much higher
compared with the others, particularly with gated community. The importance of outdoor environment
in low-cost housing is more critical where the indoor space limitation may encourage the occupants to
spend more time outside with various activities, especially to children and teenagers.
The outdoor environments such as in housing estates have unique and natural characteristics,
which are very important to support children’s development. This is crucially important in low-cost
flat where the indoor spaces of their home are limited, thus children tend to spend more time outside,
particularly, at the children playground. It is common to find unsupervised children playing at the
low-cost flat’s playground, especially after afternoon school. Away from supervision of their parents
or elder siblings, this could lead to unnecessary incident or even kidnapping to occur. Therefore, for
the health and well-being of the occupants, especially for children who grow up in low-cost flat, a
good outdoor environmental quality (OEQ) is very important.
Among all types of high-density housing, low-cost housing is always associated with poor
quality of outdoor environment. This is due to various factors such as low quality of workmanship,
minimum quality of materials, poor maintenance, lack of facilities, lack of security as well as minimal
car parks. For example, an authority’s requirements [4] on the lowest parking spaces and highest
maximum development density compared with other types are some of the contributing factors. These
minimum requirements lead to insufficient parking spaces and large ration of occupants to the area of
open spaces. On the other hand, the developers of low-cost housing also tend to only comply with the
minimum standard requirements by the related authorities. The major factor contributing to this is the
financial limitation as a result of below cost selling price. Being the only housing project that is sold
below construction cost with ready buyers, the quality of any development of low-cost housing is
potentially compromised, thus could also lead to a poor OEQ.
However, do the occupants of low-cost flat actually have the poor perception of OEQ in their
neighborhood? In order to comprehend this, a study needs to be completed to understand the
perception of the occupants of low-cost flat on OEQ. Therefore, the objective of this study is to
evaluate the satisfaction perception of outdoor environment quality by the occupants of high-density
low-cost housing. Understanding the perception of the flat occupants is important to help designers or
planners to design a better high-density housing, particularly low-cost housing. Earlier existing study
by Abdul Ghani [2] has shown that the contributing factors for the low level of satisfaction with the
neighborhood and environment of low-cost housing are poor public transportation and lack of children
playground, community halls, car parks, security and disability facilities.
Bonaiuto F, Fornara, & Bonnes [6] had categorized four features to investigate residential
environmental quality: architectural/town-planning features, functioning features, context features and
neighborhood attachment. Under these features, there are a total of 20 perceived residential
environmental quality indicators. Using Bonaiuto F, Fornara, & Bonnes [6] as a general reference, for
the purpose of this limited study, five indicators were to be evaluated (landscape quality, level of
design user-friendliness, safety within the neighborhood, provided facilities, and occupants’
involvement in the society of the housing) plus a question on overall outdoor environmental quality.
2 Methodology
The methodology adopted for this study is a combination of site observation, and questionnaire
survey. The site observation was completed prior to questionnaire survey where the authors
01005-p.2
Emerging Technology for Sustainable Development Congress (ETSDC 2014)
experienced the outdoor spaces of the low-cost flat housing. The objective of the site observation was
to have a general perception of the living condition within the low-cost flat. Once the site observation
was completed, the questionnaires' survey was distributed to the occupants while having informal
discussions with the occupants. The purpose of the informal discussion with the occupants was to
explain the questions and to have better and clearer description of the neighborhood and their
perception.
The questionnaires' survey consisted of two sections, i.e. (a) questions on demography and
information on the flat, and (b) questions related to the perception of outdoor environmental quality.
The questions related to demography were questions concerning respondent’s profile, which are
gender, age, ethnicity, marital status, duration of stay, total of occupants, and monthly income. The
second section consists of six questions. The questions related to outdoor environmental quality were
concerning overall outdoor environmental quality (OEQ), landscape quality, user-friendly level (for
children, disabled, and the elderly), safety level, provision of public facilities, and community
involvement in social activities.
The answers were rated using a 5-point Likert scale: 1-very unsatisfied, 2-unsatisfied, 3-neutral,
4-satisfied and 5-very satisfied. The survey covers 45 respondents who were selected randomly. The
survey was completed within four days, from 21st June until 24th June 2013. Out of the 45
respondents, 25 respondents were males and 20 were females. Of these, 32 were married while the
others were single. Out of 45 respondents, 60% or 27 respondents have lived within the neighborhood
for more than five years. For the occupancy numbers of the flat, the survey indicated that 34
respondents have three to five persons living together, and 11 respondents have more than five
members. In the case of the age of respondents, 14 respondents were below 25 years of age, 29
respondents were between 25 to 45 years old and 2 respondents were above 45 years old. All the
respondents were of Malay ethnicity and, according to interviews with two locals, almost all of the
residents are Malays as the low-cost flat is on a Malay reserve land.
3 Case Study
Figure 1: Taman Desa Sentosa Flat
The investigated low-cost flat (Taman Desa Sentosa Flat) (Figure 1) is situated in the Sepang
District of Selangor, Malaysia. It is approximately 30 kilometers from Kuala Lumpur, the capital city
of Malaysia. It is neighboring to Bandar Baru Bangi, and its distance to the Bandar Baru Bangi’s
commercial district is approximately 7 kilometers. The overall residential development at the site has
seven residential blocks which consist of 3 blocks of medium-cost apartment (the three blocks at the
top) and four blocks of low-cost flat (the four blocks at the bottom). This study only focuses on the
low-cost flat where the total number of units is 280. The development is located at a less-developed
area close to a planned township of Bandar Baru Bangi. The flat is close to a river on the south-east
side and surrounded by lush greenery.
01005-p.3
E3S Web of Conferences
(a)
(b)
Figure 2: (a) The layout plan of one of the apartment blocks; (b) Flat unit floor pelan
The layout plan of one of the four low-cost blocks is shown in Figure 2a. It has a typical typology
of low-cost housing, which is commonly found in Malaysia. The overall layout of the flat is simple,
thus may contribute to cost saving. The block has two rows of flats with air-wells corridor and two
stairs at each end. Each row has 6 units making each floor to have 12 units. It is a five-storey walk-up
apartment, thus the block has 30 units. The provision of air-well contributes towards better ventilation
for each unit as well as providing additional daylight along the internal corridor and into the flats. In
the case of the floor plan of each unit flat, the layout is simple that all spaces are located within a
rectangular frame (Figure 2b).
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 3: Facilities: (a) muslim prayer hall, (b) multi-purpose hall, (c) kindergarten.
Among the public facilities provided (see Figure 3) for the residents are a prayer hall, public
toilet, multipurpose hall, kindergarten, waste chamber and playground. It is important to note that the
management of the low-cost flat is not under the local authority (the Sepang Municipal Council) as the
residents have opted for self-maintenance through the resident association. However, the collection of
garbage is still under the responsibility of local authority. All facilities are functioning; however, the
maintenance of two facilities (public toilet and multi-purpose hall) is poor.
(b)
(c)
(a)
Figure 4: (a) internal corridor with parked motorcycles, (b) extended parking spaces on soft landscape
and (c) clothes were hanged on windows.
In the case of the provision of parking spaces which is low, there are various initiatives by the
local residents to solve this issue. One of the solutions is to provide new motorcycle parking close to
their building blocks. In addition, the residents have also allowed motorcycles to be parked within the
01005-p.4
Emerging Technology for Sustainable Development Congress (ETSDC 2014)
internal corridor (Figure 4a); however, the owners are not allowed to bring in motorcycles with
running engine to avoid noise. According to the locals interviewed, the main reason for allowing
motorcycles to access the corridor is due to many cases of motorcycle theft, and this option helps to
reduce theft. In the case of insufficient car park, the parking spaces have been extended to the soft
landscape next to the building blocks (Figure 4b). It is also observed that buses are parked outside the
perimeter of the housing, with provided bus waiting areas.
Due to the limited floor area, the space for laundry drying is not adequate, where only a small
balcony is provided next to the kitchen. Besides laundry drying, this space is also used for other
purposes such as storage, extended kitchen as well as locating a washing machine. In Malaysia, it is
uncommon to have a dryer, especially in a low-cost housing. As a result of these various factors, some
of the flat owners hang their laundry on windows (Figure 4c), thus results in poor view and interrupted
natural lighting and ventilation.
4 Analysis and Findings
As stated earlier, the objective of this study is to obtain the perception of OEQ by the occupants
of low-cost flats, where one question is on the perception of overall OEQ, while the other five
questions are on the significant OEQ indicators. The first question in the second section of
questionnaires is the occupants’ perception of the overall outdoor environmental quality (Figure 5).
The survey found that 55% (25 respondents) gave neutral perception of the outdoor environment
quality. 31% (14 respondents) felt satisfied with the outdoor environment quality, followed by 7% or
a total of 3 respondents felt very satisfied. Only 7% or 3 respondents chose unsatisfied. The outcome
of the first question suggests that the residents are generally satisfied with the overall outdoor
environmental quality.
Landscape is one of the key elements to achieve good OEQ of which it should be clean and neat.
For the question related to landscape quality (Figure 6), the survey found that 47% or a total of 21
respondents chose neutral, while 38% or a total of 17 respondents chose satisfied. 2 respondents stated
very satisfied, 7% or 3 respondents chose poor perception; and 2 respondents were very unsatisfied
with the landscape conditions. This is similar to findings during the site observation, where the
cleanliness of landscape is good, though generally, the landscapes are not attractive.
On the user-friendliness (Figure 7) of the flat design such as on accessibility by elderly; and
safety for residents’ activities (Figure 6), it was found that 56% or a total of 26 respondents chose a
neutral perception, while 18% (8 respondent) selected satisfied. 12% or 5 respondents chose very
satisfied; and 12% or a total of 5 respondents chose unsatisfied. Finally, only 1 respondent chose very
unsatisfied. Even though only 6 respondents had chosen either unsatisfied or very unsatisfied, it may
not suggest that staircase as the only option to upper levels is sufficient, rather it may suggest that the
respondents feel satisfied with the overall design of the low-cost flats for the price they paid.
Figure 5: Overall Outdoor Environmental Quality
01005-p.5
Figure 6: Landscape Quality
E3S Web of Conferences
Figure 7: Level of User-Friendliness
Figure 8: Security Level
On the security issue (for children, disabled, and elderly) (Figure 8), the interview with the
respondents indicated that the main concern is theft. This includes motorcycle theft. This finding is
supported by the questionnaire survey. The survey shows 31% (14 respondents) selected unsatisfied,
followed by 8% (4 respondents) chose very unsatisfied. 45% (19 respondents) chose neutral. For
satisfied and very satisfied, only 8% or a total of 4 respondents chose each of them. The perception on
security issue is the worst compared to the previous three questions but still the number of respondents
who chose unsatisfied and very unsatisfied were small compared to others. This finding suggests that
the security issue is an important issue to the residents in low-cost housing. This could be due to lack
of security in the area where security fencing is not provided as well as personnel to supervise the
security of the resident.
Figure 9: Provision of Public Facilities
Figure 10: Community Involvement in Social Activities
For the provision of public facilities (Figure 9), this survey found that 45% or 20 respondents
chose neutral, and 29% or 13 respondents selected satisfaction, followed by 18% (8 respondents)
chose very satisfied. 8% or 4 respondents chose unsatisfied, and none chose very unsatisfied. These
findings are interesting since based on the site observation, facilities such as multi-purpose hall is
poorly maintained where it can be clearly observed that some of the doors, windows and lightings are
broken. This is also similar to a poorly maintained toilet. Hence, the findings suggest that some of the
residents were not concerned much about appearance of the buildings as long as it is functional. The
findings also prove that the residents are willing to adapt to their environment, for example, the
originally provided parking spaces are insufficient; however, the residents have solved the issue by
allowing additional motorcycle parking and allowing soft landscape to become parking areas (Figure
4b).
In the case of community involvement in social activities (Figure 10), 33% (15 respondents)
chose neutral, 47% (21 respondents) expressed satisfaction, followed by 20% (9 respondents) selected
very satisfied with community involvement at the flats. None of the respondents chose unsatisfied and
very unsatisfied. This finding suggests close relation between the residents, and it also shows high
tolerance between the residents and their willingness to get involved in local community activities.
This situation may be the results of the decision by the residents not to pay maintenance fee to council
thus all maintenance costs (excluding rubbish collection) have to be borne by the residents. Therefore,
the only options to maintain their flats are through good community cooperation.
01005-p.6
Emerging Technology for Sustainable Development Congress (ETSDC 2014)
5 Conclusions
This study concludes that the outdoor environmental quality in these low-cost flats is generally
acceptable by the occupants of the low-cost flats, where the worst perception is on security issue,
which can be potentially solved with security fencing and appointment of security guards. This
finding is agreed well with the researches by Mohit et al. [1] and Abdul Ghani [2] that suggests
security control is one of the factors that is required to be improved to increase residential satisfaction
of public low-cost housing. Nevertheless, these findings do not necessarily describe the actual needs
of the residents. For example, even though perception on the provided facilities and the userfriendliness of the flat design is positive, the reality at the site suggests that these factors need a great
improvement. The findings also may not describe overall perception of high-density low-cost housing
in urban areas since the community integration in the case study is very strong, therefore, it creates
good outdoor environment such as better cleanliness. Good community integration may not be
common in other high-density low-cost housings. Thus, further investigation is required to better
understand their responses. For example, a study to answer these questions: does these positive
findings on Outdoor Environmental Quality (OEQ) are as the results of the residents being in low
income group and easily being satisfied due to their financial situation? Or does the findings in this
pilot study is valid to describe the occupants’ perception of OEQ? It is also the limitation of this study
that only a single type of low-cost flat had been chosen for survey. Therefore, it is the attention of the
authors to extend the research to include another two low-cost flats within Selangor. Hopefully, by the
completion of the subsequent research, the outcomes could better describe the occupants’ perception
of outdoor environment of low-cost flat and support the current findings.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded through the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme
(FRGS/1/2012/TK07/UKM/03/3) of Ministry of Education of Malaysia; and the Research University
Grant (GUP-2013-016) of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Mohit, M.A., M. Ibrahim, and Y.R. Rashid, Assessment of residential satisfaction in newly
designed public low-cost housing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Habitat International, 2010. 34 (1):
p. 18-27.
Abdul Ghani, S., Neighbourhood factors in private low-cost housing in Malaysia. Habitat
International, 2008. 32 (4): p. 485-493.
Idrus, N. and C.S. Ho, Affordable and quality housing through the lowcost housing provision in
malaysia, in Seminar of Sustainable development and Governance. 2008: Japan.
Syarikat Perumahan Negara Berhad SPNB - Housing for all. 2013 [cited 2013 20.10.2013]
Jabatan Perumahan Negara. Program Perumahan Rakyat (PPR). 2013 [cited 2013 02.10]
Bonaiuto, M., F. Fornara, and M. Bonnes, Perceived residential environment quality in middleand low-extension italian cities. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review
of Applied Psychology, 2006. 56(1): p. 23-34.
01005-p.7